State v. Bowman
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Monroe Circuit Court..
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
The trial court quashed the indictment, for the alleged reason that the endorsement, “A true bill,” was not properly subscribed by the foreman of the grand jury.
The indictment is endorsed as follows:
“ Charge:
“ Selling without license.
“ William Peterson.
• “A true bill.
“--, Foreman.”
It appears from the record that William Peterson was the foreman of the grand jury, and the fault in the endorsement is that he signs above the words, “ a true bill,” and not on a line with the word “ foreman.” It has long been the rule that a motion to quash will be sustained unless the indictment is endorsed by…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wood v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1883
- Stout v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Heacock v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Galvin v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Cooper v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Blume v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
- Neal v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1938
- Terrell v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1922
- Hoover v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Burnes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.